Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago

7 December 2010 Last updated at 11:16 ET
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange refused bail
 

The founder of the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks, Julian Assange, has told a court he will fight extradition to Sweden.

[img_r]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/50331000/jpg/_50331755_010802095-2.jpg[/img_r]Bail was refused and the Australian, who denies [that he] sexually assaulted two women in Sweden, was remanded in custody pending a hearing next week.

A judge at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court refused bail because of the risk of Mr Assange fleeing.

A Wikileaks spokesman said Mr Assange's arrest was an attack on media freedom.

Mr Stephens said after the court appearance he would be applying again for bail.

He also claimed the charges were "politically motivated" and he pointed out the judge had said he was keen to see the evidence against Mr Assange.

Kristinn Hrafnsson said it would not stop release of more secret files and told Reuters on Tuesday: "Wikileaks is operational. We are continuing on the same track as laid out before.

"Any development with regards to Julian Assange will not change the plans we have with regards to the releases today and in the coming days."

Secret locations

He said Wikileaks was being operated by a group in London and other secret locations.

Five people, including journalist John Pilger, film director Ken Loach and Jemima Khan, the sister of Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith, stood up in court offering to put up sureties.

But District Judge Howard Riddle refused bail for fear Mr Assange would flee the country and he was remanded in custody until 14 December.

Gemma Lindfield, for the Swedish authorities, gave details of the allegations against Mr Assange.

One of the charges is that he had unprotected sex with a woman, identified only as Miss A, when she insisted he use a condom.

Another is that he had unprotected sex with another woman, Miss W, while she was asleep.

Mr Assange, who was accompanied by Australian consular officials, initially refused to say where he lived but eventually gave an address in Australia.

Scotland Yard said Mr Assange was arrested by appointment at a London police station at 0930 GMT.

Police contacted his lawyer, Mark Stephens, on Monday night after receiving a European arrest warrant from the Swedish authorities.

An earlier warrant, issued last month, had not been filled in correctly.

At a full hearing, which is not likely to take place for some weeks, Mr Assange will be able to raise his arguments against extradition.

The 'fast-track' European arrest warrant system is based on the concept that all the participating countries have legal systems which meet similar standards, and fully respect human rights.

In other words, it is assumed a person will get an equally fair trial in any of these countries.

If the accusation from the requesting state is valid, the grounds for opposing extradition are very limited.

Mr Assange has come in for criticism in the last week for the revelations made on Wikileaks.

On Monday Foreign Secretary William Hague criticised the website for publishing details of sensitive sites, including some in the UK, saying they could be targeted by terrorists.

Former US vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has described Mr Assange as "an anti-American operative with blood on his hands".

Wikileaks was forced to switch to a Swiss host server after several US internet service providers refused to handle it.

It has also come under cyber attack and several companies, including PayPal and Amazon, have refused to supply it.

On Tuesday another company, Visa, also suspended all transactions involving Wikileaks.

Extradition can be extremely swift if the accused waives his legal rights.

But some cases, such as the extradition of computer hacker Gary McKinnon to the United States, have been going on for years because of legal challenges.

Game of cat and mouse

A European arrest warrant is designed to speed up the process but there can be delays.

Last week a district judge finally agreed to extradite British businessman Ian Griffin to France, 18 months after he was arrested for the murder of his girlfriend in a Paris hotel. Mr Griffin had been claiming he was mentally ill.

Gerard Batten, a UKIP MEP, said the Assange case highlighted the dangers of the European arrest warrant, because the judge has no power to listen to the evidence to judge if there is a prime facie case.

He said: "What concerns me is that it could be used against political dissidents. I don't know of the quality of the evidence in Mr Assange's case but it does seem that he is involved in political turmoil and intrigue and there are a lot of people keen to shut him up and there is nothing a court in the UK can do to look at the evidence before they extradite him."

Mr Assange is an Australian citizen and his supporters have written an open letter to Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard, asking her to protect him.

One of the signatories, prominent barrister Julian Burnside QC said: "First and foremost Julian Assange is an Australian citizen who is entitled to the protection of his country and does not deserve to be betrayed by his country.

"Julia Gillard has been making it virtually impossible for Assange to return to Australia where he is entitled to be. And she has even threatened to cancel his passport. That is an outrageous stance to take."

His words were echoed by Mr Pilger, who is also Australian, who said the threat to remove his passport smacked of "totalitarianism".



THE CHARGES

Unlawful coercion - used his body weight to hold down Miss A in a sexual manner.
Sexual molestation - had unprotected sex with Miss A when she had insisted on him using a condom
Deliberate molestation - molested Miss A "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity".
Had unprotected sex with Miss W while she was asleep



If it turns out that these charges can be substantiated, Assange deserves the harshest punishment the law allows. I do find the timing awfully suspicious, however. What are you willing to bet that in a few months it will come to light that both of these women are operatives for one of the governments Assange has pissed off?

I find it more than a little disheartening how quick American companies are to sever ties with their customers when the going gets rough. All it takes is a little pressure from the feds and poof, their customers are persona non grata.

By the way, I never thought the day would come that I would have to correct the grammar in an opening paragraph of a BBC article!
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
14 years ago
Foster is going to call me a commie bastard for this, but ...

IMO the state should be held to higher standard of transparency than the rest of us, not the other way around. If the state wishes to collect and use all the information about people the way that it does, then it should be wholly unable to call "foul!" when someone else does the same.

Thanks to technological change, widespread acceptance of government intrusiveness, and all the rest, we live in an extremely transparent world. Well, if you want us to be transparent and naked, then you should be willing to be at least as naked.

And, and this is what is really going to get me in trouble, if you agree voluntarily to work in the shadows, or to work under the control of generals and other politicians, then you should be aware that you are going to be put at risk when "policies" and their discussions get made public.

I don't likely agree with much of the politics of the Wikileaks people. (It's so rare that I agree with people on politics that I have to assume I'm on the other side from everyone.) But there is a part of me that admires them.

I don't believe in "official secrets."

Not in a world that doesn't allow private ones.

Official secrets just protect the powerful and their ability to manipulate our fears.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago
Well said as ever, Wade.

It always amazes me how much faith people seem to have in government. There's this underlying notion that government knows better than we do.

I've been seeing a lot of people saying lately that diplomats need secrecy to conduct their business efficiently, and that therefore these disclosures are a great betrayal. How do they know that diplomats need the veil of secrecy? Because, well, the government says they do. They also assume that there must be a legitimate reason any time the government chooses to classify a document, instead of insisting that the government provide a compelling, specific reason for the imposition of secrecy. They seem take the government unquestioningly at its word, rather than asking themselves why in a society with a representative government, they're allowing the government to police itself. I question how important the veil of secrecy is to the majority of actions that take place under the auspices of government. I especially question the notion that material is always classified for appropriate reasons. The power of classification strikes me as a ripe field for abuse, since virtually any misdeed or agenda can be cloaked in the magic garment of "national security" and hid from view. Classification wouldn't bother me nearly so much if there were some sort of accountability mechanism in place, but by definition there cannot be.

In an era in which the government views anyone who insists on personal privacy with suspicion and distrust, the government should be allowed no more secrecy than that which it is willing to grant its citizens.
zombieslayer
14 years ago

Foster is going to call me a commie bastard for this, but ...

IMO the state should be held to higher standard of transparency than the rest of us, not the other way around. If the state wishes to collect and use all the information about people the way that it does, then it should be wholly unable to call "foul!" when someone else does the same.

"Wade" wrote:



Ah. Thank you Wade. Good to see someone else out there "gets it."


Thanks to technological change, widespread acceptance of government intrusiveness, and all the rest, we live in an extremely transparent world. Well, if you want us to be transparent and naked, then you should be willing to be at least as naked.

"Wade" wrote:



Exactly. If TSA employees worked naked, then I'd be more than comfortable to go through their metal detectors naked. This is something a lot of people just don't understand. It goes right over their heads. I'm using TSA because it's the most obvious example.


And, and this is what is really going to get me in trouble, if you agree voluntarily to work in the shadows, or to work under the control of generals and other politicians, then you should be aware that you are going to be put at risk when "policies" and their discussions get made public.

"Wade" wrote:



Nicolae Ceausescu was strung up and killed by the people. When this all comes crashing down (might actually happen in our lifetime with hyperinflation), it's going to happen here as well. And it will be a good thing. I don't have sympathy for jackbooted thugs. First person who says "but they're doing their job" is an idiot. I'll say that in advance.


I don't likely agree with much of the politics of the Wikileaks people. (It's so rare that I agree with people on politics that I have to assume I'm on the other side from everyone.) But there is a part of me that admires them.

I don't believe in "official secrets."

Not in a world that doesn't allow private ones.

Official secrets just protect the powerful and their ability to manipulate our fears.

"Wade" wrote:



Yup. My biggest fear has always been the police state. Look at history. Criminals may kill a dozen people. Police states kill millions.

I'm already the wrong skin color. I've been mistaken for gay probably 30-40 times. My hair's too long. I can't keep my mouth shut. And I listen to music that Senators' wives tried to ban. I'd be one of the first people killed.

Wow Wade. Wish I could give +10 for this but you'll have to settle for a +1.
My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Pack93z
14 years ago

Foster is going to call me a commie bastard for this, but ...

IMO the state should be held to higher standard of transparency than the rest of us, not the other way around. If the state wishes to collect and use all the information about people the way that it does, then it should be wholly unable to call "foul!" when someone else does the same.

Thanks to technological change, widespread acceptance of government intrusiveness, and all the rest, we live in an extremely transparent world. Well, if you want us to be transparent and naked, then you should be willing to be at least as naked.

And, and this is what is really going to get me in trouble, if you agree voluntarily to work in the shadows, or to work under the control of generals and other politicians, then you should be aware that you are going to be put at risk when "policies" and their discussions get made public.

I don't likely agree with much of the politics of the Wikileaks people. (It's so rare that I agree with people on politics that I have to assume I'm on the other side from everyone.) But there is a part of me that admires them.

I don't believe in "official secrets."

Not in a world that doesn't allow private ones.

Official secrets just protect the powerful and their ability to manipulate our fears.

"Wade" wrote:



This I agree wholeheartedly with and as echoed.. an excellent post.

On Zombie's TSA comment.. does anyone know the security process for the TSA agents themselves? They are required to pass the same requirements as the travelers themselves.. In our CWA airport.. they all must come through a security checkpoint themselves to report for their shift.. so they are "naked" just like the rest of us so to speak.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
zombieslayer
14 years ago
They get to see us naked, we don't see them naked. It's the whole thing of who polices the police? So the TSA polices themselves? Nice. That's not very transparent. So don't mean to be a jerk, amigo, but you kind of missed Wade's point.
My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago
I have read that in the early days of the TSA, the only background checks performed on agents was a credit check. I can't confirm this, and I imagine the procedures have been tightened up since then, but it did strike me as interesting.
Pack93z
14 years ago

They get to see us naked, we don't see them naked. It's the whole thing of who polices the police? So the TSA polices themselves? Nice. That's not very transparent. So don't mean to be a jerk, amigo, but you kind of missed Wade's point.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



No.. I agree with the transparency that we should hold the government to.. and that they shouldn't be in such a rush to cover the facts of war or running this country up for us to decide upon.

I never understood the moratorium on information being released as it was in the past.. been done for decades and isn't something new.

The TSA agents walk through the same machines we the passengers do.. in front of the waiting passengers.. only difference is we don't see at the screen. This is how I know what they have to do.. I watched them prior to hoping the first flight of the AM and asked about it as I was getting patted down and my leg was getting checked for explosives.

So should we put up a public screen so the fellow passengers can see everyone "naked", the TSA agents included?

Assumption that I missed the point apparently... because of a bias that I disagree with the principles of security on commercial flights from you, however even though I am not in favor of the "x-ray" machines as crossing the line?
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Pack93z
14 years ago
On the whom polices the police?

What do you propose as an alternative? No authority figures in society at all?

The structure isn't much different than a traditional company with employment.. the courts themselves are suppose to be independent from the the police by design. Your rights, even from the police, are intended to be defended by the courts themselves.

Corruption.. sure.. as there is with most forms of government and honestly private sector itself at all levels.

But that doesn't mean that all agents of the system are corrupt and "dirty".

I can't speak to your region of the country.. but I can mine. Here in rural North Central Wisconsin, not much is covered up and little isn't seen by the public eye via county boards which are staffed by residents of the community, word of mouth, coffee shops, and internet boards and newspaper columns such as Topix, Vox Pox and county board minutes.

If you feel you don't have a voice or the system is bankrupt.. then you have two choices in front of you.. move or help change it.

There is a reason, with kids and teaching them about life that I sort of shelter them to a region I can openly see my surroundings, teach them to develop solid life skills, and at times take them into metro areas so they can see not all life is as such here.

I and my wife sacrifice some of the things we want or desire in forms of culture and net income to ensure that I have as much control and visibility of my surroundings as possible, while raising the children. That most definitely will change once they have grown and become centered adults.

I can name and have a conversation with all but one of the village, county and the one state law enforcement and have a sense of the person. Established trust.

So yes.. I have a different view of the police and government than you.. by design.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago
I don't think anyone is advocating an absence of authority figures (okay, maybe Wade is, but that's different). We just think, as do you, that the authorities shouldn't be able to claim privilege to protect their actions. I find the idea of "Executive privilege," for example, very troublesome.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (20h) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
dfosterf (23h) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
dfosterf (23h) : Trade, cut or keep
dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire
dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that
dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.
dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move
dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what
Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife
Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately
Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.
dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.
Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : Did they know that at the time or was that something the realized afterwards?
Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Van Ness played most of season with broken thumb
wpr (9-Apr) : yay
Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Mark Murphy says Steelers likely to protect Packers game. Meaning, no Ireland
Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Struggling to figure out what text editor options are needed and which are 'nice to have'
Mucky Tundra (8-Apr) : *CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP*
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Will there be a tracker on the ball or something?
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
57m / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

16-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

15-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

30-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Mar / Random Babble / wpr

28-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

26-Mar / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.